Background and Preparation for Translations Discussion
Under the Every Student Succeeds Act, all state plans must provide additional information
regarding English learners taking the state academic assessments. The law passed in
December 2015 includes the following language:
(F) LANGUAGE ASSESSMENTS.—
(i) IN GENERAL.—Each State plan shall identify the languages other than English that
are present to a significant extent in the participating student population of the State
and indicate the languages for which annual student academic assessments are not
available and are needed.
The US Department of Education released draft regulations in July 2016 related to
assessments. The FAQ provides some guiding principles.
Supporting English learners and Native American students:
The proposed regulations clarify that the new law anticipates a single statewide English
language proficiency assessment, consistent with existing state practice; and make clear
that states must offer appropriate accommodations to English learners on content
assessments, as well as accommodations on the ELP assessment for ELs with
disabilities.
The law also requires states to make every effort to make native language assessments
available for all languages present “to a significant extent” in a state, and the regulations
require that states define what it means for a language to be present “to a significant
extent,” including that the most common language (besides English) be included in that
definition.
The regulations also permit states to administer assessments of reading/language arts in
a Native American language for students enrolled in a Native American language school
or program until the student is in grade 8.
The Draft regulations are provided below:
Section 200.6 Inclusion of All Students
English Learners
Statute: Section 1111(b)(2)(B)(vii)(III) of the ESEA requires a State's assessment system to
provide for the participation of all students, including English learners. English learners must be
assessed in a valid and reliable manner and provided appropriate accommodations including, to
the extent practicable, assessments in the language and form most likely to yield accurate data
on what those students know and can do in academic content areas until they have achieved
English proficiency. Section 1111(b)(2)(F) requires a State to identify in its title I State plan the
languages other than English that are present to a significant extent in the student population of
the State and indicate the languages for which annual academic assessments are not available
and are needed. Notwithstanding this provision, a State must assess an English learner on the
State's reading/language arts assessment in English after the student has attended public
schools in the United States (except for schools in Puerto Rico) for three or more consecutive
years. On a case-by-case basis, an LEA may assess a student's knowledge in
reading/language arts in a language or form other than English for two additional years if the
student has not yet reached a level of English proficiency sufficient to yield valid and reliable
information on what the student knows and can do on tests written in English.
Current Regulations: Current § 200.6(b)(1) requires each State to include limited English
proficient students in a valid and reliable manner in their academic assessment systems.
Specifically, under current § 200.6(b)(1)(i), a State must provide limited English proficient
students with reasonable accommodations and, to the extent practicable, assessments in the
language and form most likely to yield accurate and reliable information on what such students
know and can do. Current § 200.6(b)(1)(ii) requires each State, in its title I State plan, to identify
languages other than English that are present in the student population served by the SEA and
to indicate the languages for which academic assessments are not available and are needed.
For each language for which assessments are needed, a State must make every effort to
develop such assessment and may request assistance from the Secretary in identifying
linguistically accessible academic assessments that are needed.
Additionally, current § 200.6(b)(2) requires a State to assess limited English proficient students'
achievement in English in reading/language arts if those students have been in public schools in
the United States (except schools in Puerto Rico) for three or more consecutive years, and
clarifies that this requirement does not exempt the State from assessing limited English
proficient students for three years. Under the current regulations, an LEA may continue, for no
more than two years, to assess a limited English proficient student in reading/language arts in
the student's native language if the LEA determines, on a case-by-case basis, that the student
has not reached a sufficient level of English language proficiency to yield valid and reliable
information on reading/language arts assessments written in English.
Proposed Regulations: The proposed regulations in § 200.6(f)(1)(i) would carry over the
requirements from current § 200.6(b)(1)(i), because the ESEA maintains the requirement that
English learners be assessed in a valid and reliable manner that includes reasonable
accommodations. Proposed § 200.6(f)(1)(i)(A) would clarify that English learners who are also
identified as students with disabilities under proposed § 200.6(a) must be provided
accommodations as necessary based on both their status as English learners and their status
as students with disabilities.
Proposed § 200.6(f)(1)(ii)(A) would require a State to ensure that the use of appropriate
accommodations does not deny an English learner the opportunity to participate in the
assessment, or any of the benefits from participation in the assessment, that are afforded to
students who are not English learners, including that English learners who employ appropriate
accommodations, consistent with State accommodations guidelines, can also use the results of
such assessments for the purpose of entrance into to postsecondary education or training
programs or for placement into credit-bearing courses in such programs.
The requirements in proposed § 200.6(f)(1)(ii)(B)-(E) would clarify a State's responsibility to
provide for the assessment of English learners in the language most likely to yield accurate data
on what those students know and can do in academic content areas, to the extent practicable.
Specifically, a State would be required to provide in its title I State plan a definition for
“languages that are present to a significant extent in the participating student population” and
identify which languages other than English are included in this definition. In determining which
languages are present to a significant extent, a State must ensure that its definition
encompasses at least the most populous language other than English spoken in the
participating student population, and consider languages spoken by distinct English learner
populations (including those who are migratory, immigrants, or Native Americans), as well as
languages that are spoken by significant numbers of English learners in certain LEAs or in
certain grade levels.
The State must then identify in its title I State plan whether assessments are available in any
languages other than English and, if so, for which grades and content areas. For the languages
determined to be present to a significant extent by the State, the State must also indicate in
which languages academic assessments are not currently available but are needed. For each of
those languages, a State would be required to describe how it will make every effort to develop
assessments in languages other than English by, at a minimum, providing a plan and timeline,
describing the process it used to gather public input and consult with key stakeholders, and, if
needed, providing an explanation for why it was unable to develop assessments in the
languages that are present to a significant extent.
Reasons: The ESEA requires the provision of appropriate accommodations for English learners,
including assessments in languages other than English if needed and practicable, in order to
ensure that English learners are fairly and accurately assessed. The proposed regulations echo
these statutory requirements. Additionally, negotiators agreed it is important to clarify that
English learners who are also students with disabilities must be provided accommodations for
both English learner status and status as a student with a disability because this population has
unique needs that are sometimes overlooked.
The statutory provisions pertaining to assessments in languages other than English remain very
similar to the requirements of the ESEA, as amended by the NCLB. However, section
1111(b)(2)(F) now requires that States make every effort to develop assessments in languages
“present to a significant extent in the participating student population”; given this new language
in the ESEA, as amended by the ESSA, the proposed regulations provide relevant clarification.
The proposed regulations would provide criteria to guide States in determining which languages
other than English are present to a significant extent so that States can ensure that all English
learners are included in the assessment system in a valid and reliable manner and to facilitate
States' ability to make every effort to develop needed assessments. Rather than specify a
particular definition for languages “present to a significant extent in the participating student
population,” the negotiating committee recommended higher-level criteria that a State must
follow in establishing its definition of this term. These criteria, laid out in proposed
§ 200.6(f)(1)(iv), would reflect a minimum expectation for a State to meet the statutory
requirements in this area, as well as critical considerations raised by negotiators (for example,
considering languages that are spoken by significant portions of students in particular LEAs).
In recent years, a number of States have developed or provided content assessments in the
native languages of English learners. For example, in the past, Washington state provided
translated versions of math and science assessments for all grades in Chinese, Korean,
Russian, Somali, Spanish, and Vietnamese; Michigan provided math and science assessments
for all grades in Spanish and Arabic. In school year 2013-2014, 13 States offered
reading/language arts, mathematics, or science assessments in languages other than English.
Two consortia of States, the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers
(PARCC) and the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (Smarter Balanced), offered
native language options during their first year of administration in school year 2014-2015.
Twenty-one States, the District of Columbia, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and the Department of
Defense Education Activity (DoDEA) are in one of these assessment consortia. Smarter
Balanced offers a full “stacked” Spanish translation of its math assessments (i.e., the complete
Spanish and English versions are both provided to the student), pop-up glossaries in the 10
most common languages across the States in the consortium, and word-to-word dictionaries in
other languages. PARCC provides a Spanish translation of its math assessments at the
discretion of a State and offers translated directions and parent reports in the most common
languages, with word-to-word dictionaries available for other languages.
Each State must define languages “present to a significant extent,” identify those languages,
and make every effort to develop or offer assessments in those languages (including creating a
plan and timeline for developing assessments in such languages, gathering public input, and
consulting with key stakeholders). If there is a significant reason preventing a State from
completing the development of these assessments, proposed § 200.6(f)(ii)(E)(3) would allow a
State to provide an explanation of these overriding factors. Overall, negotiators wanted to
ensure that English learners are included in academic assessments in a valid and reliable
manner, including that States provide assessments in languages other than English when
needed to gather accurate data on the knowledge and skills of English learners in academic
content areas. Given that not all States have yet been able to develop assessments in
languages other than English, negotiators agreed that providing clarity about what steps a State
must take to demonstrate it has met the statutory requirements and leaving open flexibility if a
State faces significant obstacles in developing such assessments would be helpful for the State
and, ultimately, for students themselves.
Students in Native American Language Schools or Programs
Statute: Section 1111(b)(2)(B)(ix) of the ESEA specifically excludes students in Puerto Rico
from the requirement to measure knowledge of reading/language arts in English after three or
more consecutive years of enrollment in schools in the United States because the language of
instruction in Puerto Rico is Spanish.
Current Regulations: None.
Proposed Regulations: Proposed § 200.6(f)(2)(i) would provide an additional exemption to the
requirement that students must be assessed in reading/language arts using assessments
written in English after three years of attending schools in the United States (or five years, as
determined by an LEA on a case-by-case basis) for students in Native American language
programs or schools, pursuant to certain requirements laid out in proposed § 200.6(g).
Under the proposed regulations, this exemption would be available only for students enrolled in
schools or programs that provide instruction primarily in a Native American language. Further,
students enrolled in these Native American language schools or programs may be excluded
from being assessed using a reading/language arts assessment written in English only if the
State: Provides an assessment of reading/language arts in that Native American language that
meets the requirements of proposed § 200.2 and has been subject to the Department's
assessment peer review; continues to assess the English language proficiency of all English
learners enrolled in such schools or programs using the State's annual English language
proficiency assessment; and ensures that students in such schools or programs are assessed in
reading/language arts, using assessments written in English, by no later than the end of the
eighth grade.
Finally, proposed § 200.6(h) would incorporate the definition of “Native American” from section
8101(34) of the ESEA.
Reasons: The Federal government has a trust responsibility to American Indian tribes. As part
of this responsibility, Congress has emphasized the importance of preserving and revitalizing
Native American languages in many Federal laws, including the ESEA, which contains support
for schools and programs that use Native American languages as the primary language of
instruction. Specifically, the following sections of the ESEA are relevant to this issue:
Section 6133, which authorizes a new discretionary grant program for Native American
and Alaska Native language immersion schools and programs to maintain, protect, and
promote the rights and freedom of Native Americans and Alaska Natives to use,
practice, maintain, and revitalize their languages;
Section 3127, which addresses programs for Native American children studying Native
American languages;
Section 6111, which states that a purpose of Indian education is to meet the unique
cultural, language, and educational needs of such students;
Section 6205, which authorizes grants to entities operating Native Hawaiian programs of
instruction in the Native Hawaiian language and establishes a priority for use of the
Hawaiian language in instruction; and
Section 6304, which authorizes use of grant funds for instructional programs that make
use of Alaska Native languages and native language immersion programs or schools.
In addition, the Native American Languages Act of 1990 (NALA) requires all Federal agencies to
encourage and support the use of Native American languages as a medium of instruction and
states that it is the policy of the United States to preserve, protect, and promote the rights and
freedom of Native Americans to use, practice, and develop Native American languages.
Moreover, Executive Order 13592, “Improving American Indian and Alaska Native Educational
Opportunities and Strengthening Tribal Colleges and Universities,” sets forth the
Administration's policy, including “to help ensure that American Indian/Alaska Native students
have an opportunity to learn their Native languages.” These declarations of Federal policy are
supported by growing recognition of the importance of Native language preservation in
facilitating educational success for Native American students. In a 2007 study by Teachers of
English to Students of Other Languages (TESOL),[1] the majority of Native American youth
surveyed stated that they value their Native American language, view it as integral to their
sense of self, want to learn it, and view it as a means of facilitating their success in school and
life.
As a result, the negotiating committee recommended including the proposed exemption, which
would be available only for students enrolled in schools or programs that provide instruction
primarily in a Native American language (i.e., 50 percent or more of instructional time), including
students identified as English learners and students without such designation. The additional
requirements for this exemption are designed to ensure high-quality programs and outcomes for
students. For students in a Native American language program who are also English learners,
the LEA would still be required to administer the annual English language proficiency
assessment as required under section 1111(b)(2)(G) and to provide English language services
pursuant to civil rights obligations. The requirement to use an assessment of reading/language
arts in English no later than the eighth grade is intended to ensure that students are able to
succeed in high school and postsecondary institutions in which the language of instruction is
English. There are many different models of Native American language programs. Some start
as immersion in the Native American language and gradually transition to more English
throughout elementary school, whereas others adopt a bilingual approach across the grades.
States or districts would have the flexibility under this exemption to decide in which grade to
begin administering the reading/language arts assessment in English, so long as students begin
taking such assessments in English no later than the eighth grade.
Importantly, this exemption in proposed § 200.6(g) reflects the input of negotiators, especially
tribal leader negotiators on the negotiating committee. The tribal leader negotiators emphasized
the Federal government's responsibility to help revitalize Native American languages in light of
the history of Federal eradication of those languages, including through boarding schools where
students were stripped of their tribal identities and languages. They also emphasized the
Federal commitment to preserve Native American languages as found in the NALA as well as
the ESEA. They articulated how the provision of reading/language arts assessments in Native
American languages is critical for promoting high-quality instruction in Native American
languages, which in turn facilitates improved educational outcomes for Native American
students in these schools and programs, as well as helping to ensure the survival of Native
American languages for future generations.
The definition of “Native American” in proposed § 200.6(h) would incorporate the definition of
this term in section 8101(34) of the ESEA. Under that definition, “Native American” and “Native
American language” have the same meaning as in section 103 of the NALA. Under NALA,
“Native American” means an Indian (as defined in 20 U.S.C. 7491(3), which is now section 6151
of the ESEA, but was unchanged substantively by the ESSA), Native Hawaiian, or Native
American Pacific Islander. The definition of “Indian” in section 6151 of the ESEA, includes
Alaska Natives, as well as members of any federally recognized or State-recognized tribes.
Because it is difficult to ascertain the full definition from section 8101(34) of the ESEA alone, we
propose to provide the full definition in this section for the convenience of the public.
Additional resources providing context for discussion:
•
•
•
Until 2006 Minnesota provided translations of Math assessments in grades in Spanish,
Hmong, Somali, and Vietnamese.
o The usage was rather limited. For example, in 2003-04 printed quantity was:
 Spanish gr. 3: 1,000; gr. 5: 700; gr. 7: 650
 White Hmong gr. 3: 300; gr. 5: 300; gr 7: 550
 Vietnamese gr 3: 150; gr. 5: 200; gr. 7: 250
 Somali gr. 3: 250; gr. 5: 225; gr. 7: 300
o MDE was not able to ensure the technical adequacy of the translations due to not
having assessment experts fluent in the languages translated.
English Language experts expressed concerns
o Many students learning English are not literate in their first language
o Translated assessments were available in only four languages; more translations
were requested
Due to the costs, limited usage, and concerns expressed, MDE determined that
translations would no longer be provided beginning spring 2006.
Counts per Home Language based on 2016 MCA administration
Language
Count 3-12
Spanish
Somali
Hmong
Vietnamese
Karen
Russian
Oromo
Ojibwa, Chippewa,
Anishinaabemowin
24,006
11,343
10,319
2,217
1,885
1,261
785
Avg. per grade
Around 4,000
Under 2,000
Under 1,750
Under 350
Under 500
Around 200
Under 200
106
Under 25
Costs per Language – Translation (includes text to speech)
Language
Spanish
Somali
Hmong
Vietnamese
Karen
Russian
Oromo
Math (adaptive)
$445,000
$475,000
$475,000
$470,000
$500,000
$465,000
$490,000
Science
$75,000
$75,000
$75,000
$75,000
$75,000
$75,000
$76,000
Costs – Pop-up Glossaries: $500,000 for math and science
Pop-up glossaries in the online tests would provide word-to-word translations for keywords in
mathematics and science. Keywords are generally defined as technical/academic vocabulary.
Keywords will be translated into eleven languages: Arabic, Chinese, Hmong, Karen, Khmer,
Laotian, Oromo, Russian, Somali, Spanish, and Vietnamese.
This option assumes pop-up glossaries would be applied to operational and field test items in
the math bank to allow for students to take an adaptive form and to the fixed science forms each
year. Translation of identified academic words in math bank; Translation of identified academic
words on linear science forms; Translator vendor review of translations in forms
Costs – Other Resources
Currently Minnesota translates the Parent Fact Sheets and the Achievement Level Descriptors
into the following eleven languages: Arabic, Chinese, Hmong, Karen, Khmer, Laotian, Oromo,
Russian, Somali, Spanish, and Vietnamese. Some additional testing support materials that
could improve outreach to adults are listed below. The costs assume the eleven languages
currently translated.
Parent Materials Audio
MCA Parent Fact Sheet Audio,
MTAS Parent Fact Sheet Audio,
and Test Preparation Suggestions
for Parents and Teachers Fact
Sheet
Translated Individual Student
Reports
Translated ISR mailed to district
Reports coded by Pearson
Technology
All grades and subjects MCA and
MTAS translated and coded into
nine languages; translated ISRs
requested via TestWes
Requirements and Notes
Translation audio CD
Requirements and Notes
Translation of ISRs in 11 languages for
districts to send out along with the ISR in
English. Reading, Math, and Science ISRs
Translated Manuals and
Materials
Requirements and Notes
Translation of Minnesota
Assessment System Interpretive
Guide (MCA and MTAS)
40 pages
MCA & MTAS Closed Caption ISR
Overview Videos
Translate the script into 11 languages and
Provide Closed Captioning for 11 languages
Cost
$170,000
Cost
$950,000
Cost
$215,000
$75,000
In order to satisfy requirements, MDE looks forward to your feedback to improve the process.
During the November 3 meeting we will be discussing:
•
How many students would be administered accountability tests in their home language?
o
How would the students be identified?
o
How would concerns regarding students’ literacy in home language be
addressed?

Reading

Math and Science
•
How will Minnesota define/identify “languages other than English that are present to a
significant extent in the participating student populations?”
•
What will be Minnesota’s plan for providing academic assessments in these languages?
o
Adaptive? Fixed forms?
o
Pop-up glossary? Direct translation?
o
Dual-language development?
•
What would the timelines for implementation be?
•
How does funding/cost play a role in any of the above decisions?
•
What languages should testing materials be translated into?
•
o
What languages does Minnesota define/identify other than English that are
present to a significant extent in the adult populations?
o
Possible materials to be translated for adults includes those listed above.
Additional suggestions?
When we provide content on the Minnesota Report Card in multiple languages
o
Will numbers be translated or do they stay the same? (Some languages have
different characters other than 1, 2, etc.)
o
Do school/district names need to be translated?
o
Are we looking to translate report titles, circle I text, etc. and leave school names
and numbers alone?